Direct™
AIPLA Direct is an exclusive online information service that delivers substantive, to the
-
Supreme Court Says PTAB’s Time Bar Decisions Not Appealable
April 20, 2020
The United States Supreme Court on April 20, 2020, held that 35 U.S.C. § 314(d), which states that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) decision to institute an inter partes review (IPR) is nonappealable, also precludes judicial review of a time bar determination under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). -
Supreme Court Says Government Can't Recoup Attorney's Fees When Defending § 145 Actions
December 11, 2019
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) cannot recover the pro rata salaries of its legal personnel under § 145 of the Patent Act, the Supreme Court held December 11, 2019. Peter vs. NantKwest, Inc., U.S., No. 18-801, 12/11/19. -
Supreme Court Finds Bar on Scandalous or Immoral Trademarks Unconstitutional
June 25, 2019
On June 24, 2019, the Supreme Court upheld the Federal Circuit's decision in In re Brunetti, 877 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2017), ruling that the Lanham Act provision which bars the registration of “immoral[ ] or scandalous” trademarks violates the First Amendment. Iancu v. Brunetti, No. 18-302, 6/24/2019. -
Supreme Court Says Government Can't Challenge Patents Through AIA Proceedings
June 11, 2019
-
Scott Boalick Named PTAB Chief Judge
March 13, 2019
The USPTO has appointed Scott R. Boalick as Chief Judge for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). -
Helsinn: Supreme Court Rules That AIA Did Not Change On-Sale Doctrine
January 23, 2019
The Supreme Court held that the America Invents Act (AIA) did not change the on-sale doctrine, affirming the decision of the Federal Circuit. -
USPTO Announces Revised Guidance on Sections 101 and 112
January 4, 2019
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on January 4, 2019, announced newly revised 35 U.S.C. § 101 guidance for use by USPTO personnel in evaluating subject matter eligibility. The USPTO also announced guidance on the application of 35 U.S.C. § 112 to computer-implemented inventions. -
USPTO Issues Final Rule on Claim Construction Standard
October 11, 2018
The final rule replaces the "broadest reasonable interpretation" standard with the federal court claim construction standard, also known as the Phillips standard, that is used to construe a claim in a civil action under 35 U.S.C. § 282(b). -
David Ruschke to Become Senior Advisor to Patents
September 2, 2018
USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Chief Judge David P. Ruschke is stepping down from his current role on September 2, 2018, to accept a new position as Senior Advisor to Patents, according to the USPTO. -
USPTO May Not Collect Attorneys’ Fees in Section 145 Actions
July 30, 2018
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is not entitled to an award of attorneys' fees under the statutory language in 35 U.S.C. 145 stating that "[a]ll the expenses of the proceedings shall be paid by the applicant," the en banc Federal Circuit held July 27, 2018 in a 7-4 decision. Nantkwest, Inc. v. Iancu, Fed. Cir., No. 16-1794, 7/27/2018. -
Lost Foreign Profits May Be Recovered For Section 271(f)(2) Infringement
June 22, 2018
Section 284 of the Patent Act permits an award of foreign lost profits as well as damages for infringement under Section 271(f)(2) by supplying components of a patented invention overseas for assembly there, the Supreme Court held June 22, 2018. WesternGeco LLC v. Ion Geophysical Corp., U.S., No. 16-1011, 6/22/2018. The ruling is consistent with an AIPLA amicus brief filed in this case. -
Supreme Court Issues 2 IPR-Related Decisions
April 24, 2018
On April 24, 2018, the US Supreme Court released two decisions related to Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). -
Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument On Non-Instituted Claims in PTAB Decisions
November 29, 2017
The Supreme Court on November 27, 2017 heard oral argument on whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is required by 35 U.S.C. 318(a) to address every patent claim challenged in a petition for inter partes review (IPR). SAS Institute, Inc. v. Lee, U.S., 16-969, oral argument 11/27/2017.
AIPLA Direct is the proprietary material of the American Intellectual Property Law Association and may not be copied, distributed, or posted on the Internet without permission. The reports are provided to AIPLA members as an Association benefit and are meant to encourage non-members to join the Association. Authorization to make copies of selected material may be obtained by sending requests to Meghan Donohoe, Chief Operating Officer, at mdonohoe@aipla.org.